Are there any technical advantages to the new type-C front panel connector standard?

Jedibeeftrix

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
138
i.e. will it always provide a performance floor above that which could be assumed on previous USB 3.x motherboard headers?

e.g. assumes a minimum data-rate of 10Gbps (rather than the possibility of supplying only 5Gbps)
e.g. assumes a minimum power delivery of 18W (rather than the possibility of supplying only 5W)
e.g. allows a possibility to supply network over USB (which is something that wouldn't be possible from USB 3.x headers)
e.g. allows a possibility to supply video-out over USB (which is something that wouldn't be possible from USB 3.x headers)

Curious if there are any technical advantages over and above a nicer connector that is easier to plug in...

Thanks. JBT
 

kaaoszx

n00b
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
8
off the top it supports more bandwidth. So whatever chip/device is inside can take advantage of higher speeds. and With 4 data lanes, USB 3.1 Type-C can even carry DisplayPort and HDMI video signals, I'm assuming the wattage standard for power delivery means it can also fast charge smart devices.
 

kaaoszx

n00b
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
8
another important thing I just looked up.
Forenote: USB 3.0 was renamed to USB 3.1 Gen 1

a hub, the controller is the part that defines the usb protocol (and therefore speed) which it supports. The connector which can handle USB 3.1 Gen 1 (5Gbps) is identical to one which can handle USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10Gbps). The difference is which version the controller on the port supports.

The USB 3.1 Gen 1 hub has the same connectors as a USB 3.1 Gen 2 hub, but the controller is different.
 

ZzBloopzZ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Messages
1,316
another important thing I just looked up.
Forenote: USB 3.0 was renamed to USB 3.1 Gen 1

a hub, the controller is the part that defines the usb protocol (and therefore speed) which it supports. The connector which can handle USB 3.1 Gen 1 (5Gbps) is identical to one which can handle USB 3.1 Gen 2 (10Gbps). The difference is which version the controller on the port supports.

The USB 3.1 Gen 1 hub has the same connectors as a USB 3.1 Gen 2 hub, but the controller is different.
Oh wow, good to know. If I upgrade to a new mobo, can I use my old cases USB 3.1 Gen 2 header for the front USB 3.0/3.1 Gen 1 to use as USB 3.0? Meaning is it backwards compatible?
 

Jedibeeftrix

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
138
I've read elsewhere that an old-style USB 3.1 (10Gbps) m/b header will work fine on a old-style USB 3.0 ports on a case.

Re: the advantages of the new-style header -
Is this all possibilities, or are there any headline upgrades you can [always] expect from the new-style headers?
i.e. always get a minimum of 10Gbps
i.e. always get a minimum of 18W
etc
 

ryan_975

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
14,556
No. Having a USB-C port does not guarantee any additional capability over USB Type A ports. It depends totally on what features are provided by the controller it’s connected to.
As an example, heres what the manual says about my system’s rear USB-C port
NOTE: The Type-C port only provides the USB data function, and no alternate video or Thunderbolt mode features are supported.
 

Epos7

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
393
No. Having a USB-C port does not guarantee any additional capability over USB Type A ports.
I think the OP is asking about the USB motherboard header, not the USB ports themselves.

The new motherboard header is 20-pin (I think 40-pin versions with twice the bandwidth also exist) and is referred to as a type-E or type-A header. The old standard USB 3.0 motherboard header is 19-pin.

I think the new header allows for more bandwidth, regardless of whether you connect it to a USB-C or USB-A port. USB's naming scheme is so confusing however it's hard to say for sure.
 

ryan_975

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
14,556
Whether the OP was talking about the actual port or the header it connects to doesn't make a difference to what I said. From the point it leaves the controller it's all just wires connecting to each other. There's still no guarantee that any given feature of USB-C will be available other than a basic link (and that doesn't even have to be USB 3.0)
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
18,139
Whether the OP was talking about the actual port or the header it connects to doesn't make a difference to what I said. From the point it leaves the controller it's all just wires connecting to each other. There's still no guarantee that any given feature of USB-C will be available other than a basic link (and that doesn't even have to be USB 3.0)
yup usb-c is just the connector style.
 

Epos7

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
393
Whether the OP was talking about the actual port or the header it connects to doesn't make a difference to what I said. From the point it leaves the controller it's all just wires connecting to each other. There's still no guarantee that any given feature of USB-C will be available other than a basic link (and that doesn't even have to be USB 3.0)
Rereading the OP's post, I think they were asking about the port so it's correct that there isn't an advantage to USB-C.

However, for motherboard headers the new standard offers more bandwidth. It's USB 3.2 Gen 2. For example, from the Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Impact manual:

usb.jpg


The old style header is referred to as USB 3.2 Gen 1 and can transfer at up to 5Gb/s.
The new style header is USB 3.2 Gen 2, sometimes called the USB-C front panel header. It can transfer at up to 10 Gb/s.
 
Last edited:

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
18,139
Rereading the OP's post, I think they were asking about the port.

However, for motherboard headers the new standard offers more bandwidth. It's USB 3.2 Gen 2. For example, from the Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Impact manual:

View attachment 246949

The old style header is referred to as USB 3.2 Gen 1 and can transfer at up to 5Gb/s.
The new style header is USB 3.2 Gen 2, sometimes called the USB-C front panel header. It can transfer at up to 10 Gb/s.
and those speeds are dependent on the controller behind the connector. the header itself doesnt up the speed.
 

Epos7

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
393
and those speeds are dependent on the controller behind the connector. the header itself doesnt up the speed.
In that case I'm confused. Why wouldn't motherboard manufacturers just use the old header and offer faster speeds on it? Surely that would be easier than switching to a new header.
 

ryan_975

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Messages
14,556
In that case I'm confused. Why wouldn't motherboard manufacturers just use the old header and offer faster speeds on it? Surely that would be easier than switching to a new header.
The signals are slightly different for USB-C.

the 19-pin header has signaling for two superspeed channels, two USB2.0/1.1 channels, and two power pins . It’s intended to supply two Type-A ports.

The 20-pin header adds two configuration channels, two side band channels, and an additional power pin but has only one USB2.0 channel. It’s intended to supply a single USB-C port, and would only be able to correctly supply a single USB Type-A port.

USB-C can offer higher per port speeds through link aggregation, but it’s most important benefit is a that it’s a single reversible connector ( no more A/B/mini/micro Schrödinger’s crap) that is flexible enough to utilize many alternative signaling protocols.
 
Last edited:

Jedibeeftrix

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
138
thank you all.

so it appears that the new motherboard connector does not mandate any level of performance beyond the minimum that might be expected of the old style connector (even if it does offer the potential of greater performance).
Whether that be:
1. data-rates
2. power delivery
3. alt modes

just as an FYI on where i'm coming from:
It would be nice if every device using the new header [had] to offer at least 5Gbps (even if it offered 480Mbps also)
It would be nice if every device using the new header [had] to deliver at least 15W of power, to enable 3.5" external drives to be bus-powered.
It would be nice if every device using the new header [had] to enable displayport alt mode (not bothered by this one, just providing an example).
 
Top